11
\$\begingroup\$

I play a level 4 Eldritch Knight who is going use a longsword and whip with the dual wielder feat, which I took at level 4. As it turns out I can't cast spells with 2 weapons in my hands so I had to think of something.

Can I use the the 2 weapon interactions from the dual wielder feat on a single weapon?

You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.

I was thinking of the following order of events.

  • I start the turn with both weapons in my hands
  • I stow the whip
  • I use green flame blade with my longsword as 1d10 + GFB damage
  • I draw my whip again.

Is this possible or am I overlooking something?

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ What's the purpose of this trick? \$\endgroup\$
    – Mark Wells
    Dec 25, 2018 at 2:33

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
26
\$\begingroup\$

Dual Wielder only allows drawing/stowing a second weapon

Your plan would fall over at the last step because you only get one free object interaction per turn.

From "Other Activity on Your Turn" (PHB, p. 190):

You can also interact with one object or feature from the environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example, ... you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to attack.

[...]

If you want to interact with a second object, you need to use your action.

The Dual Wielder feat does not give you two free item interactions, it lets you draw or stow two weapons at the same time instead of one. Drawing and stowing the same weapon clearly cannot be done simultaneously, so this would require two item interactions to achieve.

The relevant benefit of the Dual Wielder feat (PHB, p. 165):

  • You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.

As it stands, your plan would only work if you waited until you next turn to draw the whip again or if you found a way to have two actions (e.g. haste, Action Surge, etc.) so that you have an extra action with which to draw the whip again.

That said, green-flame blade in particular, as I understand it, wouldn't require you to put the whip away, since it doesn't require a Somatic component and the Material component is "a weapon" (SCAG, p. 143). It goes on to say:

As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon...

So you could skip all this whip juggling and just cast the spell with your action, using your blade in hand (the other hand being irrelevant).

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Technically, what the OP is wanting to do, stow and draw the same whip, is, in fact, interacting with only one object, not a second object. While it might not have been what was intended, the rules you've quoted don't preclude doing a second thing with the same object. There may be other text that precludes it, but what you've quoted so far doesn't. OTOH, what you've quoted does make it clear that the Dual Wielder feat doesn't affect this situation. \$\endgroup\$
    – Makyen
    Dec 24, 2018 at 21:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ The War Caster feat would help, right? \$\endgroup\$
    – tox123
    Dec 24, 2018 at 22:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NathanS Re: only needing one hand to cast green flame blade: you're totally right. But I think the OP was trying to have two hands available for the longsword so they could get the 1d10 versatile damage from the sword instead of the 1d8 one handed damage. \$\endgroup\$
    – Gandalfmeansme
    Dec 25, 2018 at 2:37
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Oh, you also might want to mention that some DMs (including Jeremy Crawford ) will let you drop an item without using up your "interact with an object" for the round. Then all you'd have to worry about is an enemy using a held action to grab your dropped weapon (which only is likely if you use this tactic several times in a row). But let me stress, the answer is great as it is. \$\endgroup\$
    – Gandalfmeansme
    Dec 25, 2018 at 2:39
7
\$\begingroup\$

Short answer? No.

...because Dual Wielder isn't giving you two weapon interactions. It's making your one weapon interaction affect two weapons at a time. It doesn't let you split it up, it doesn't let you apply it twice to the same weapon. It just lets you draw both weapons at once or sheathe them both at once

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ I think this is correct, but I also think that this answer could use a bit more support. \$\endgroup\$
    – KorvinStarmast
    Dec 24, 2018 at 14:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ Exactly. Additionally, in the english language, if the same sequence of "or" terms is repeated, then the second instance of "or" sequence indicates the exact same choice as in the first sequence, and is not a completely new and independent "or" choice. This means that Dual Wielder does not let you sheate a weapon in one hand while also drawing another weapon in the other hand at the same time. It must be both drawing, or both sheating. The Dual Wielder feat's wording could have been made a bit clearer on that point, though, as it is a commonly made english-language-reading misconception. \$\endgroup\$
    – Pat
    Oct 10, 2019 at 12:13
0
\$\begingroup\$

No, because drawing your whip again at the end of the turn is not part of your move or your action.

You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example, you could open a door during your move as you stride toward a foe, or you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to attack.

When you stow your whip, you're doing it in order to cast a spell (because you need a free hand).

When you draw your whip afterward, it's not in the course of anything. Your action is over. If you tried to draw it "during your move" I'd also disallow that, since (1) you can interact with an object either during your move or your action and you already interacted with it during your action, and (2) more importantly, drawing a weapon doesn't facilitate your movement.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ This feels a bit like nitpicking: Given that movement can be split in many little increments spread all around the turn, a player just has to say that he moved "only" 29 feet and 11 inches out of his 30 feet of movement, and then, at the moment of his exact choosing. moved the last inch. Basically, given the way movement is allowed to be used in 5e, specifiying "during your action or your movement" is pretty much meaningless since because of the way movement works, unless the character cannot move for some reason, that terminology becomes completely synonymous with "during your turn". \$\endgroup\$
    – Pat
    Oct 10, 2019 at 12:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .